Help to tweak my 4-1-2-3

[W-Walton]

Hi,

I would very much like your input on my 4-1-2-3 playing with Nürnberg in the Bundesliga. A picture on my tactics and set up is attached.

A couple of thoughts and questions from my own.

• What are the optimal roles at central midfield for this set up? As it is right now, I've put the Carrilero on the MCR spot to cover up for my attacking WB (or am I thinking wrong here, that the box-to-box-midfielder should be on the right side?
• I feel though that the Carrilero role is a bit to stationary, as it won't dribble or move the ball forward. For the next season I'm looking to change this if possible, with a more dynamic role for the MCR. Thoughts anyone?
• Should my Ball playing defender (DCR) be on cover instead of defence? due to the attacking minded wingback on the right side?
• Any other thoughts on my set up when it comes to In possession, In transistion and out of possesion?

Best regards,
Walton

 

@Experienced Defender 
@llama3

Edited April 3, 2020 by W-Walton

[Experienced Defender]

52 minutes ago, W-Walton said:

Your midfield trio looks a bit too conservative overall. That may not be too much of an issue if your left back was a bit more attack minded (WB on support instead of FB on support), so that he would provide more width in the final third and serve as a wide passing option when the IF moves inside. Another option is to keep the LB as FB on support, but change the BBM into CM on attack duty and AML into the standard winger on support. See which of these options better suits your players. 

But the bigger problem are your instructions. In-possession ones are needlessly too rushed (extremely high tempo coupled with a high team mentality is the most problematic one), whereas the out-of-possession TIs are overly aggressive, which not only increases defensive vulnerability but also deprives your players of space up front. Tight marking in particular makes no sense in a tactic like yours (including the formation as well). 

52 minutes ago, W-Walton said:

As it is right now, I've put the Carrilero on the MCR spot to cover up for my attacking WB (or am I thinking wrong here, that the box-to-box-midfielder should be on the right side?

The right side is good. Carrilero (or BWM on support) makes a lot more sense in MCR than BBM, considering the roles of your RB and AMR. 

 

52 minutes ago, W-Walton said:

Should my Ball playing defender (DCR) be on cover instead of defence? due to the attacking minded wingback on the right side?

If you use the offside trap - as you obviously do - then both CBs should be on the same duty (defend). If you want one CB on cover, then remove the offside trap. Simple. 

[W-Walton]

10 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Your midfield trio looks a bit too conservative overall. That may not be too much of an issue if your left back was a bit more attack minded (WB on support instead of FB on support), so that he would provide more width in the final third and serve as a wide passing option when the IF moves inside. Another option is to keep the LB as FB on support, but change the BBM into CM on attack duty and AML into the standard winger on support. See which of these options better suits your players. 

But the bigger problem are your instructions. In-possession ones are needlessly too rushed (extremely high tempo coupled with a high team mentality is the most problematic one), whereas the out-of-possession TIs are overly aggressive, which not only increases defensive vulnerability but also deprives your players of space up front. Tight marking in particular makes no sense in a tactic like yours (including the formation as well). 

The right side is good. Carrilero (or BWM on support) makes a lot more sense in MCR than BBM, considering the roles of your RB and AMR. 

 

If you use the offside trap - as you obviously do - then both CBs should be on the same duty (defend). If you want one CB on cover, then remove the offside trap. Simple. 

Really thanks for the input.

I've adjusted the roles and tactics as you suggested to try it out. 
I'm not sure though what you mean with: "...whereas the out-of-possession TIs are overly aggressive, which not only increases defensive vulnerability but also deprives your players of space up front".
I'm guessing it's about the pressing intensity. That my few players up front won't be able to get an effective press and get out of position?

Interesting about the tight marking, why does it not suit my playing style/tactic?

If I would like to keep the role Box to Box midfielder for the next season. What are the options on the MCR-postion other then Carrilero? If I want to be less conservative on the central midfield but still solid.

BR, Walton

I attached a new photo of the tactics after the editing.

 

Edited April 4, 2020 by W-Walton

[DarJ]

11 minutes ago, W-Walton said:

I'm not sure though what you mean with: "...whereas the out-of-possession TIs are overly aggressive, which not only increases defensive vulnerability but also deprives your players of space up front".
 

He's talking about the section where you adjust your defensive line and line of engagement

[Experienced Defender]

4 hours ago, W-Walton said:

 

4 hours ago, W-Walton said:

I'm not sure though what you mean with: "...whereas the out-of-possession TIs are overly aggressive, which not only increases defensive vulnerability but also deprives your players of space up front".
I'm guessing it's about the pressing intensity

Yes, but you do not need to go with less urgent instead. Just leave it to default. Only higher D-line and offside trap - that's enough. 

 

4 hours ago, W-Walton said:

That my few players up front won't be able to get an effective press and get out of position?

It's not about your players up front but the whole team, because team instructions affect all players. The much bigger problem is the defense being caught out of position than your forwards. That's why I prefer to leave the team pressing urgency on default and then only apply a split block via player instructions. 

 

4 hours ago, W-Walton said:

Interesting about the tight marking, why does it not suit my playing style/tactic?

Because tight marking makes sense for tight and compact defensive styles and (preferably) in a bottom-heavy formation, because the players are close enough to help each other when someone gets drawn out of position when defending. But your tactic is definitely not of this kind. 

 

4 hours ago, W-Walton said:

If I would like to keep the role Box to Box midfielder for the next season. What are the options on the MCR-postion other then Carrilero? If I want to be less conservative on the central midfield but still solid

It really depends on the overall quality of your team as a whole and its strengths and weaknesses. The stronger/better your players are, the more risk you can afford to take (and vice versa). But it does not mean that you can/should completely ignore the need for tactical balance, even if you manage the best team in the world. 

[W-Walton]

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

That's why I prefer to leave the team pressing urgency on default and then only apply a split block via player instructions. 

Higher def. line and standard LOE is split block right?

 

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

It really depends on the overall quality of your team as a whole and its strengths and weaknesses. The stronger/better your players are, the more risk you can afford to take (and vice versa). But it does not mean that you can/should completely ignore the need for tactical balance, even if you manage the best team in the world. 

Thanks but do you have some suggestions on specific roles that could suit, other than Carrilero? Central Midfielder (support) or would that leave to much of a gap, as the WB-R is set on attack?

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, W-Walton said:

Higher def. line and standard LOE is split block right?

No. Split block is when you leave the team pressing urgency on default and then tell your most advanced players to close down more in their player instructions. 

 

1 hour ago, W-Walton said:

Thanks but do you have some suggestions on specific roles that could suit, other than Carrilero? Central Midfielder (support) or would that leave to much of a gap, as the WB-R is set on attack?

If you want to play the right back on attack duty, then I would definitely not recommend playing the MCR in a non-holding or non-covering role.